Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND Colonoscopy is commonly used to screen for neoplasia. To assess the performance of screening colonoscopy in everyday practice, we conducted a study of the rates of detection of adenomas and the amount of time taken to withdraw the colonoscope among endoscopists in a large community-based practice. METHODS During a 15-month period, 12 experienced gastroenterologists performed 7882 colonoscopies, of which 2053 were screening examinations in subjects who had not previously undergone colonoscopy. We recorded the numbers, sizes, and histologic features of the neoplastic lesions detected during screening, as well as the duration of insertion and of withdrawal of the colonoscope during the procedure. We compared rates of detection of neoplastic lesions among gastroenterologists who had mean colonoscopic withdrawal times of less than 6 minutes with the rates of those who had mean withdrawal times of 6 minutes or more. According to experts, 6 minutes is the minimum length of time to allow adequate inspection during instrument withdrawal. RESULTS Neoplastic lesions (mostly adenomatous polyps) were detected in 23.5% of screened subjects. There were large differences among gastroenterologists in the rates of detection of adenomas (range of the mean number of lesions per subject screened, 0.10 to 1.05; range of the percentage of subjects with adenomas, 9.4 to 32.7%) and in their times of withdrawal of the colonoscope from the cecum to the anus (range, 3.1 to 16.8 minutes for procedures during which no polyps were removed). As compared with colonoscopists with mean withdrawal times of less than 6 minutes, those with mean withdrawal times of 6 minutes or more had higher rates of detection of any neoplasia (28.3% vs. 11.8%, P<0.001) and of advanced neoplasia (6.4% vs. 2.6%, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS In this large community-based gastroenterology practice, we observed greater rates of detection of adenomas among endoscopists who had longer mean times for withdrawal of the colonoscope. The effect of variation in withdrawal times on lesion detection and the prevention of colorectal cancer in the context of widespread colonoscopic screening is not known. Ours was a preliminary study, so the generalizability and implications for clinical practice need to be determined by future studies.

[1]  D. Lieberman,et al.  Colonoscopy practice patterns since introduction of medicare coverage for average-risk screening. , 2004, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[2]  D. Rex,et al.  Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates. , 2000, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[3]  D. Lieberman.  Colonoscopy: As Good as Gold? , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  J. Potter,et al.  Long-term efficacy of sigmoidoscopy in the reduction of colorectal cancer incidence. , 2003, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[5]  Colorectal cancer prevention 2000: screening recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology , 2000 .

[6]  B. Petersen,et al.  Evaluation of Polyp Detection in Relation to Procedure Time of Screening or Surveillance Colonoscopy , 2004, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[7]  W. Hogan,et al.  Volume and Yield Of Screening Colonoscopy at a Tertiary Medical Center After Change in Medicare Reimbursement , 2003, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[8]  A. Zauber,et al.  The National Polyp Study , 1990 .

[9]  Jane Wardle,et al.  Wide variation in adenoma detection rates at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. , 2004, Gastroenterology.

[10]  D. Rex,et al.  Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. , 1997, Gastroenterology.

[11]  Yu-Sun Lee.  Early malignant lesions of the colorectum at autopsy , 1988, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[12]  S. Raab,et al.  Interobserver and Intraobserver Variability in the Cytologic Diagnosis of Normal and Abnormal Metaplastic Squamous Cells in Pap Smears , 2001, Acta Cytologica.

[13]  R. Hayes,et al.  Variability in flexible sigmoidoscopy performance among examiners in a screening trial. , 2005, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[14]  A. Sonnenberg,et al.  Prevention of Colorectal Cancer by Flexible Endoscopy and Polypectomy: A Case-Control Study of 32 702 Veterans , 1995, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[15]  J. Church,et al.  Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer , 2002, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[16]  R. Capocaccia,et al.  Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence , 2001, Gut.

[17]  S. Woolf,et al.  Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence. , 2003, Gastroenterology.

[18]  R. Barclay.  Safety, efficacy, and patient tolerance of a three-dose regimen of orally administered aqueous sodium phosphate for colonic cleansing before colonoscopy. , 2004, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[19]  A. Zauber,et al.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. , 1993 .

[20]  Perry Pickhardt,et al.  Location of Adenomas Missed by Optical Colonoscopy , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[21]  Emily F Conant,et al.  Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. , 2003, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[22]  A. Zauber,et al.  The National Polyp Study. Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas. , 1990, Gastroenterology.

[23]  J Cuzick,et al.  Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas. , 1992, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  I. Hassan.  Observer variation in the detection of colorectal neoplasia on double-contrast barium enema: implications for colorectal cancer screening and training. , 2005, Clinical radiology.